Talk:Chinese cities
I do not think this article should be deleted but expanded by adding the default names of the Chinese cities in the game along with other characteristics of these cities that are unique.--J2n4t6o81 12:11, 26 May 2009 (UTC) :I agree 100%. Listing them in the order in which a computer player creates them will be helpful, because a human player gets an idea of what other cities remain to be discovered as soon as he or she finds one. — Robin Patterson (Talk) 15:21, 26 May 2009 (UTC) ::This page should probably be deleted now, since the civilization pages for the Chinese in Civ 1, 2, and 3 list the cities now. Russ3Z (talk) 17:42, May 31, 2017 (UTC) :::No! Civs 1, 2, and 3 are by no means all of the games we cover that have Chinese cities. (And I'm surprised that anyone would want to include a long list of cities on an already long page that covers several aspects of a civilization.) -- Robin Patterson (Talk) 02:31, June 2, 2017 (UTC) ::::How exactly do we want to handle cities, then? Is there a desire for an article for every city? I believe that in the earlier games, at least, they are pretty generic, with the only difference being that the first city in the list is the capital. Some cities from the early games do have individual pages already, however. If that's not desired, perhaps articles such as "Chinese cities (Civ2)" and so on (which could then be linked from an Overview version of this page), that simply list them out? Another option might just be an extension of the civilization's article, such as "Chinese (Civ2)/Cities", linked to from a then much shorter "Cities" section in the article. Russ3Z (talk) 20:33, June 2, 2017 (UTC) :::::Well, I really don't see the use for this page either. Like Russ3Z mentioned, the civilization pages already list all of the cities (just see them from Chinese!). There are no incoming links to this page and until now I had no idea this page even existed. The "Chinese (Civ2)/Cities" format would work, the list of cities could be included in the civ page like it currently is (perhaps under a "Click to expand..." element, as, like Robin said, they are long lists on already long pages). If anyone then wanted to have a collection page like this, it'd be trivial to just include all those lists to it. Whatever we do, I really wouldn't want to see the information duplicated to many places, which is why the includable pages would sound good, in case the lists need to exist on several pages. —ZeroOne (talk) 21:56, June 2, 2017 (UTC) ::::::Some of the above objections are over-generalizing or just plain wrong. I have just looked at Chinese and picked one of its game page links at random: Chinese (CivRev) does not list the cities. I would support Russ's suggestion of making this an overview page, letting game specialists create pages such as Chinese cities (C-evo) with whatever level of detail seems appropriate for the game, and ideally linked from the relevant "cities" and/or "civilization" article (which I see I should have done from Cities (C-evo) - too many things to think about all at once!). I'm sorry there are no incoming links to this page; we were struggling to create a workable wiki when it was created. Maybe that's another job for me! My wife is sure I have better things to do, but I sneak back here occasionally. -- Robin Patterson (Talk) 00:40, June 3, 2017 (UTC) ::::::I came here after reading Exitwound 45's comment on the Talk:London (Civ5) page, and wanted to throw in my two cents on both that discussion and this one. I support rewriting the city lists for each game in the format of " ()/Cities," on which we could then link the names of capitals and major cities to dedicated articles. It would serve more of a purpose than having articles like London (Civ1), London (Civ5), and London (CTP2) to talk about an element of the game that doesn't even have its own Civilopedia entry is basically the same from one game to the next (though we could copy the information from the dedicated articles and include it under a subsection in the article for the city itself if it's somehow vital to the game). Robin's idea about having " cities ()" isn't a bad one either, though it does mean that more information will be duplicated. -Mythril Wyrm (talk) 02:23, June 25, 2017 (UTC) ::::::: ()/Cities would be a new type of name structure. Currently we have no subpage names starting with "Chinese". The subpage format has some advantages and some disadvantages. But I don't see how the choice of name style will mean that "more information will be duplicated". I do think that this discussion should be on a generic cities talk page or forum rather than half-hidden on a specific civ's cities page! -- Robin Patterson (Talk) 00:02, June 26, 2017 (UTC) ::::::::Well, as ZeroOne mentioned above, the city list for each civ is already included in the civ's article for that game. If we have, say, a page named "Chinese (Civ6)" and another named "Chinese cities (Civ6)", I'm not sure what kind of information will be in the latter article that isn't already in the former. We could simply add a see template with a link to the " cities ()" article in each " ()" article, though that means either more clicking or more typing for readers who want to know what cities a given civ can found. However, it doesn't involve massive formatting changes, and can be easily accomplished with some copying and pasting (which I can start doing if there are no objections). ::::::::And I stand by my point about articles for the same city in each game being unnecessary, unless said city appears in a game as a city-state. -Mythril Wyrm (talk) 17:11, June 26, 2017 (UTC)